↓ Skip to main content

Adverse effects of Influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 virus infection on growth performance of Norwegian pigs - a longitudinal study at a boar testing station

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Veterinary Research, December 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Adverse effects of Influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 virus infection on growth performance of Norwegian pigs - a longitudinal study at a boar testing station
Published in
BMC Veterinary Research, December 2014
DOI 10.1186/s12917-014-0284-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chiek Er, Bjørn Lium, Saraya Tavornpanich, Peer Ola Hofmo, Hilde Forberg, Anna Germundsson Hauge, Carl Andreas Grøntvedt, Tore Framstad, Edgar Brun

Abstract

BackgroundInfluenza A(H1N1)pdm09 virus infection in Norwegian pigs was largely subclinical. This study tested the hypothesis that the infection causes negligible impact on pigs¿ growth performance in terms of feed conversion efficiency, daily feed intake, daily growth, age on reaching 100 kg bodyweight and overall feed intake. A sample of 1955 pigs originating from 43 breeding herds was classified into five infection status groups; seronegative pigs (n=¿887); seropositive pigs (n=¿874); pigs positive for virus at bodyweight between 33 kg and 60 kg (n=¿123); pigs positive for virus at bodyweight between 61 kg and 80 kg (n=¿34) and pigs positive for virus at bodyweight between 81 kg and 100 kg (n=¿37). Each pig had daily recordings of feed intake and bodyweight from 33 kg to 100 kg. Marginal effects of the virus infection on the outcomes were estimated by multi-level linear regression, which accounted for known fixed effects (breed, birthdate, average daily feed intake and growth phase) and random effects (cluster effects of pig and herd).ResultsThe seropositive and virus positive pigs had decreased (P value<0.05) growth performance compared to seronegative pigs even though feed intake was not decreased. Reduced feed conversion efficiency led to lower average daily growth, additional feed requirement and longer time needed to reach the 100 kg bodyweight. The effects were more marked (P value<0.03) in pigs infected at a younger age and lasted a longer period. Despite increased feed intake observed, their growth rates were lower and they took more time to reach 100 kg bodyweight compared to the seronegative pigs.ConclusionOur study rejected the null hypothesis that the virus infection had negligible adverse effects on growth performance of Norwegian pigs.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 33 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 33%
Researcher 5 15%
Professor 4 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 9%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Other 4 12%
Unknown 4 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 9 27%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 24%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 6%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 7 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 July 2015.
All research outputs
#14,791,252
of 22,772,779 outputs
Outputs from BMC Veterinary Research
#1,244
of 3,045 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#202,713
of 360,775 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Veterinary Research
#37
of 95 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,772,779 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,045 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 360,775 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 95 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.